Updated May 12, 2025 at 3:40pm: The text of the summary explaining the motion has been changed.

A motion before the TTC Board meeting on May 14 seeks to have staff examine ways to make service more reliable:

TTC4.9 – Optimizing Scheduling Efficiency and Enhancing Service Planning Using Technology – by Chair Jamaal Myers, seconded by Commissioner Dianne Saxe

Recommendations

Chair Jamaal Myers, seconded by Commissioner Dianne Saxe, recommends that the TTC Board:

1. Direct TTC staff to conduct an analysis of surface corridor TTC routes where multiple TTC routes operate on the same corridor to optimize scheduling efficiency, improve blended headways and customers wait times and identify opportunities and implications for scheduling and operational adjustments that minimize bunching and gapping and enhance coordination between routes serving the same corridor.

2. Direct TTC staff to explore opportunities to use artificial intelligence (AI) and predictive analytics to enhance our service planning and scheduling and management of gapping and bunching, and report back through the Strategic Planning Committee on best practices and priority actions to be integrated in the 2026 Operating and Capital Budgets.

Summary

Original version: This motion directs staff to review bunching and gapping on all routes where multiple TTC routes use the same corridor to explore how scheduling can be optimized to improve headways and reduce bunching and gapping of vehicles. This motion also directs staff to explore how Al and predictive analytics can be used to enhance service planning and the management of gapping and bunches on all routes and make recommendations for priority actions that could be integrated into the 2026 Operating and Capital budgets.

Revised version: Currently, TTC vehicles are not considered “bunched” for purposes of route planning, if multiple buses are traveling together so long as they are representing different bus routes. This motion directs staff to review bunching and gapping on all routes where multiple TTC routes use the same corridor to explore how scheduling can be optimized to improve headways and reduce bunching and gapping of vehicles. This motion also directs staff to explore how Al and predictive analytics can be used to enhance service planning and the management of gapping and bunching on all routes and make recommendations for priority actions that could be integrated into the 2026 Operating and Capital budgets.

There are several problems with this motion, but a few are key.

• The idea of a “scheduled” time simply does not work especially when service is fairly frequent. Riders care about regularity, not that each bus or streetcar is spot on its assigned time. Yes, of course, if the service were “on time”, it might also be regular, but forcing this to occur is counter-productive. The question is how to ensure reliably even spacing between vehicles.
• The TTC’s Service Standards and the rules operators are supposed to follow are based on the schedule, but this is not a workable guide to running service under typical conditions found on busy routes. If the TTC really wants evenly spaced service, then this should be the standard the organization aims for.
• There will always be some variation between ideal and actual vehicle locations whether this is measured by a schedule or by a target headway spacing. That’s the nature of transit even on a completely protected route like the subway. The goal is to control and minimize this variation before small problems become very large ones.
• Many streets are served by a single route with no branches or overlaid service, and headways are not reliable. This problem shows up throughout the day, not just in periods where external forces such as surge loads, traffic congestion and plagues of frogs can be blamed. The TTC should learn how to run “simple” routes reliably, and then we can talk about more complex route structures.
• “Artificial Intelligence” does not learn out of thin air, but from a combination of examples and goals. If we train bots on the collected works of Donald Trump, don’t expect Shakespearean verse. So it is with Toronto’s transit. The current system is hardly an example to learn from, and even with input from other cities, the basic question of goals must be answered. If we tell the bot to optimise for general traffic and transit will benefit oh-by-the-way, the bot will quickly say “look at all those cars” and move them as quickly as possible.

I have written many articles reviewing service behaviour on routes, and the problem of irregular service has, if anything, grown worse over the years. In “the old days” there were issues with the adequacy of scheduled travel times combined with growing traffic congestion, and this led to lengthened trips. Even where operators get adequate time for terminal breaks, this does not guarantee reliable service, although it does reduce the need for short turns.

Those short turns are a valid response to service problems. For a time, a simplistic embargo on this service management technique actually worsened bunching because gaps could not be filled by a judicious turnback. Vehicles stayed in bunches.

TTC management, with the tacit approval of the Board if only through their ignorance, produced reports showing that on average the service wasn’t too bad. “TTC’s goal is to have 60% of all trips meet the on-time performance standard.” [Service Standards at p. 15] This is an all-day average and individual periods could vary without affecting the overall metric.

Every rider knows that the “average” service is not what pulls up (or not) to their stop every day.

Quality is measured only from the terminal, and two closely-spaced cars will run nose-to-tail fairly quickly because the first one does all of the work. They will stay together for an entire trip, and possibly the return.

Service standards allow vehicles to be up to five minutes late, but on a frequent route that can mean long gaps are followed by a pair of vehicles. Oddly enough, the standards actual recognize that riders care more about vehicle spacing for frequent services (10 minutes or better) than if buses are on time, and yet the metric routinely used by the TTC is schedule based, not headway based.

This not a scheduling problem, but a policy and management that aim low. It’s easy to get a gold star on an exam where you can be almost correct, and then only 60% of the time.

Traffic congestion, construction delays and special events generating surge loads are predictable to a point, although traffic accidents are not. The question is how the TTC deals with these events. Either all schedules are padded on spec in case of delays, an expensive way to deal with an issue that does not affect most routes at most times, or there has to be a recognition that scheduling alone will not solve the problem.

The TTC will make several changes to service on May 11 primarily for the transition to summer schedules with lower post-secondary school demand, and to restructure service for a major construction project.

For details on the King/Church project and its potential effects on traffic congestion, see King-Church Construction and Traffic Effects. Affected routes are 503/303 Kingston Road, 504/304 King, 508 Lake Shore and 511 Bathurst. For details, see that article.

Updated May 6, 2025 at 3:40 pm: Spreadsheet listing service designs for old and new schedules added.

Updated May 7, 2025 at 8:50 am: Diversion map for Roe Loop summer Saturday closures added.

Updated May 8, 2025 at 7:45 am: Spreadsheet updated with corrected data for 92 Woodbine South.

Updated May 8, 2025 at 11:40 pm: Spreadsheet updated with data for 939 Finch Express.

Updated May 9, 2025 at 3:30 pm: Destination sign changes added for all affected routes.

Permanent Service Changes:

• 9 Bellamy:
  • Service improved in the morning, afternoon and early evening on Saturdays, and in he afternoon and early evening on Sundays to reduce crowding.
  • Service reduced early mornings on Saturday, and on late evenings on Saturday/Sunday.
  • Service adjusted in late evenings to align with Lakeshore GO trains at Scarborough and Eglinton GO stations.
• 101 Downsview Park: Trips are added in the peak periods to better align with the GO Barrie service at Downsview Park Station. This has been informally in effect since March 2025.
• 114 Queens Quay:
  • Service adjusted in all time periods for reliability and to take advantage of new reserved bus lanes on Queens Quay.
  • Service officially removed from the Logan, Lake Shore, Carlaw loop with the route extended to Lake Shore Garage. This change has informally been in effect since September 2024.
• 123 Sherway:
  • Service improved on weekends to address crowding during most periods.
  • The current 1:13am trip by the 123B from Long Branch Loop will be changed to 1:17am to better connect with the Lake Shore GO train.
• 125 Drewry:
  • Service improved early evenings on weekends, and early morning on Saturday to address crowding.
  • Saturday “afternoon” service levels will extend from 7:00 to 8:00pm.
• 134 Progress: Weekday midday and early evening schedules will be adjusted to provide evenly spaced departures from Centennial College Progress Campus by the 134 Progress and 903 Kennedy Station Express services.
• 165 Weston Road North: The routing of YRT 165 Weston on April 27 will change to operate both ways via Weston Road, and it will no longer run on Old Weston Road. Transfers to TTC’s 165 Weston Road North can be made on Steeles at Weston or at Old Weston northbound, and at Signet Drive southbound.
• 927 Highway 27 Express:
  • All service will operate with 40-foot buses due to constraints on the articulated bus fleet. Service will run more frequently in many weekend periods to ensure sufficient capacity.
  • 927A weekday midday school trippers to Humber College will be removed for the summer.
• 939 Finch Express: All service will operate with articulated buses.

Seasonal changes:

• 22 Coxwell: Holiday service will extended to the loop at Lake Shore and Northern Dancer Blvds, and will be interlined with 92 Woodbine South. Service on both routes will be adjusted. There is no change to regular weekday or weekend service.
• 38/938 Highland Creek: Service on the 38B to University of Toronto Scarborough Campus (UTSC) and on the 938 express will be discontinue for the summer. Service on the 38A branch to Rouge Hill GO will be improved during weekday peak and midday periods.
• 65 Parliament: Service will be reduced weekdays in the early morning, AM and PM peaks.
• 75 Sherbourne:
  • Service will be reduced weekdays in the early morning, AM peak, midday and PM peak.
  • Schedules adjusted to reflect implementation of reserved bus lanes on Queens Quay. Buses will no longer stop westbound on Queens Quay at Richardson.
  • The north end layover point will be shifted from South Drive at Glen Road to Bloor Street East at Sherbourne Station.
• 92 Woodbine South: Service improved during all periods.
• 102 Markham Road:
  • 102A to Progress/Centennial College service removed for the summer.
  • Some late evening trips will be adjusted to go out of service on Markham Rd at Sheppard Ave E instead of Warden Station and/or Markham Rd at Progress Ave. This change will also improve transfers with the 385 Sheppard East night bus.
• 124 Sunnybrook and 162 Lawrence-Donway: Saturday service until 3pm will be extended west to Bathurst and Lawrence so that Roe Loop can be closed for a community market.
• 200 Toronto Zoo: Service from the Toronto Zoo to Rouge Hill GO will resume on weekends from morning to early evening periods. Weekday service will resume with the June schedule change.
• 201 Bluffer’s Park: Service from Kennedy Station to Scarborough Bluffs Beach will resume on weekends from morning to early evening periods. Weekday service will resume with the June schedule change.
• 202 Cherry Beach:
  • Union Station to Cherry Beach service will resume with weekday service from the midday to early evening period (ending at 10:20 pm from Cherry Beach), and weekend service from the morning to late evening period.
  • Schedules will be adjusted to take advantage of the reserved bus lanes on Queens Quay.
• 902 Markham Rd Express: Three weekday trips from Warden Station at 7:35, 7:47 and 7:59am will be dropped.
• 903 Kennedy Stn-STC Express: Some weekday trips on the 903A branch to Centennial College will be cut back as 903B trips to end at STC Station. All weekend trips will operate as 903B ending at STC.
• 905 Eglinton East Express: Service reduced during all weekday periods.
• 927 Highway 27 Express: See the service change section above.

Additional service will be provided on some routes due to a temporary surplus of operators. Note that these are separate from the Route 600 RAD (Run as Directed) buses:

Operational changes that do not affect service levels:

• 1 Yonge-University-Spadina: The break/relief point will move from Vaughan Metropolitan Centre Station to Wilson Station. Double step-backs will be scheduled at all times at both Vaughan Metropolitan Centre and Finch Stations in anticipation of increased off-peak service in late 2025.
• 510 Spadina: Carhouse trips to/from Leslie Barns will operate via Queen Street rather than King Street due to the King/Church construction.
• Night bus crews: All night bus crews ending at or after 5:00 a.m. will be adjusted to go into and out of service at their respective divisions instead of on-street.
• 31 Greenwood: Service to Greenwood Station has not operated for several months due to construction. This will now be reflected in the “official” route description.
• 72 Pape: This route will be scheduled with electric vehicles in late evenings.
• 91 Woodbine: The north end layover point will be changed from Valley Woods Road at York Mills Road (west side) to York Mills at Valley Woods (northside).
• 112 West Mall: This route shifts from Queensway to Mount Dennis division. No schedule change.
• 365 Parliament Night Bus: The stop westbound on Queens Quay at Richardson will be removed as part of the reserved bus lane implementation.
• All routes serving the former Villiers Island in the Port Lands will now include its permanent name Ookwemin Minising in the destination signs.
• Several routes will gain new destination signs for garage trips replacing the generic “short turn”.

Tables and maps appear after the “more” break in this article.

The TTC Board met on April 16 with many items on its agenda including a report on Extreme Precipitation Planning.

Anyone living in Toronto will remember the heavy rains of July 2024 and the snows of February 2025. July 15-16 brought 115mm of rain within 24 hours, higher than the 100-year design for storms. From February 8-17, Toronto saw over 60cm of snow accumulation with no melts between storms. This was the highest snow pack in 25 years.

Both of these events revealed shortfalls in both TTC’s and City’s response to extreme weather. They also undermined the credibility of management claims of the transit system’s physical state, and the City’s false claims about snow clearing. The split jurisdiction between TTC and City forces did not help the situation either.

Among the issues raised in the report are:

• The (in)adequacy of drainage on City streets to prevent ponding and flooding of underground structures.
• The (in)adequacy of TTC drains for streetcar tracks, subway tunnels and stations.
• The condition of drainage and pumping systems from inadequate maintenance and deferred replacement of aged equipment.
• The integrity of TTC buildings, tunnels and other infrastructure to prevent or limit water penetration.
• The actual condition of roads that were supposedly plowed versus reported conditions.
• The absence of snow clearing at transit stops.
• The creation of windrows both along curbs and between streetcar and adjacent lanes where the curb lane is not used by autos.
• The failure to remove accumulated snow on transit routes causing repeated cases of parked cars blocking streetcars, and in some cases, buses.
• The TTC’s ability to keep subway open cut areas operational when there is a large accumulation of snow on the tracks and power rails.
• The adequacy and timeliness of public information provided to riders about transit operations during emergency conditions.

Many of these are interrelated. For example, if snow were actually cleared to the curb on four-lane roads with streetcars or buses, then autos would park normally rather than obstructing the only other lane available for transit vehicles. If maintenance of drainage and pumping systems (both day-to-day and life-cycle) kept them in working order, then less water would accumulate and potentially block service or render stations unsafe. If passengers could board and alight from transit vehicles with their usual ease, buses and streetcars would not be delayed attempting to serve snowed-in stops.

Among the TTC’s observations is the challenge of operating streetcars and articulated buses in bad weather, particularly snow. How much of this an inherent shortcoming of the vehicles, and how much is the effect of inadequate infrastructure maintenance and snow clearing?

Both from the delay logs and from personal experience, transit vehicles continued to be blocked by parked cars, and stops were blocked by snow, well after the snowfall ended. Some of the snowbanks did not dissipate until they melted. One particularly ironic location was at the southbound stop on Bay at Albert Street, the City Hall stop.

These are not just issues for the once-in-a-blue-moon weather events, but for the general condition and robustness of transit and related city infrastructure.

The report actually contemplates the purchase of spare buses, and possibly a new garage to hold them, to deal with periods when streetcars and articulated buses have operating difficulties. This would present a substantial premium in fleet size, garaging and staffing for these vehicles. One cannot help asking if the same money invested in better service generally would be more productive, combined with more aggressive storm responses when needed.The TTC is silent on the subway (for which bus replacements are completely inadequate even in good weather), and on the extra staff who would have to be available on the off chance of a bad storm.

This ludicrous approach avoids responsibility for making the streets and the transit system as robust as possible in their own right. Elsewhere I have written about the TTC’s bad habit of maintaining a spare ratio for their fleets well above industry targets, and “just buying more buses” would make the problem even worse. It is the kind of response I would expect from a system whose CEO considers crowded buses a mark of success, and months-long slow orders on deteriorated subway track as perfectly normal.

The TTC routinely trots out its list of unfunded capital projects. Critical maintenance such as replacement of pumps for subway tunnels is on that list. This is not a “nice to have”, but essential for safety. However, the problem is not just in capital funding, but under-resourcing of routine maintenance, an operating budget issue. We know the effects this brought to subway and SRT track. What other aspects of the system are waiting to fail?

The capital budget lines related to extreme weather effects total $1.4 billion of which only $360 million is funded in 2025-2034, mainly in the early years. (See TTC Major Projects Update and Funding Shortfalls for details.)

The TTC will make several service changes on March 30, 2025. Most of the changes will increase the frequency of service, but in some cases there are reductions. There are also a few cases where the new schedules adjust travel times, but the frequency is unchanged.

Updated March 27, 2025 at 10:15am: The detailed spreadsheet showing changes in headways, travel times and vehicle assignments is now available.

• 20250330_ServiceChanges

Updated March 28, 2025 at 11:15pm: Erroneous entries in the first/last trip table that were copied from the TTC’s service change memo have been updated with information from the electronic version of the schedules (GTFS) on the City’s Open Data site.